DCIT, Jaipur V. PARAS PARTEEK REAL ESTATE P LTD., Jaipur

ITA 89/JPR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 8923114 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 28-01-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: G G MUNDRA C A DHK

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH VH-VKJ-EHUK] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JM & SHRI T.R. MEENA, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 89/JP/2013 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 THE DCIT CIRCLE- 2 JAIPUR CUKE VS. M/S. PARAS PARTEEK REAL ESTATE (P) LTD. 351, 3 RD FLOOR, GANPATI PLAZA, M.I. ROAD, JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: AACCP 9340 D VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI KAILASH MANGAL, JCIT . FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI G.G. MUNDRA, C.A. LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 13/02/2015 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27/02/2015 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-I, JAIPUR DATED 08-11-2012 FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2008-09 WHEREIN THE REVENUE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUND. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN SEPARATI NG THE HEADS OF INCOME AND TREATING THE RECEIPTS FROM LET OUT PROPE RTY AS INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY AND ALSO HOLDING THAT THE RECEI PTS AGAINST HIRING OF FURNITURE AND FIXTURES IS ASSESSABLE U/S 56(2)(II) INSTEAD OF 56(2)(III). ITA NO. 89/JP/2013 DCIT , CIRCLE- 6, JAIPUR VS. PARAS PRATEEK REAL EST ATE (P) LTD. . 2 2.1 THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE OUTSET CONTENDS THAT THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS SQUARELY COVERE D IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. CIT(A) ALLOWED ASSESSEE'S APPEAL BY FOLLOWING ORDER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 WHICH WAS CHALLENGED BY THE REVENUE AND THIS BENCH OF ITAT VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 19-09-2014 IN ITA NO. 415/JP/2011 DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE, TH US DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS . 4. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE A RGUED THAT IN LEASE DEED THE RENT FOR BUILDING AND RENT FOR FU RNITURE AND FIXTURES HAVE BEEN PROVIDED SEPARATELY. IT IS NOT A COMPOSIT E LEASE DEED. HE FURTHER ARGUED THAT HON'BLE SUPREME COURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF SULTAN BROTHERS (SUPRA) IS NOT SQUARELY APPLICABLE ON THE ASSESSEES CASE. IN THE ASSESSEES CASE, THE COMPANY HAS PURCH ASED OFFICE PREMISES FOR LETTING IT OUT. LATER ON, FACILITY OF AC AND OT HER FITTINGS WERE PROVIDED, WHICH ARE EASILY BE SEPARABLE FROM OFFICE PREMISES. THE LEASE DEED CLEARLY SHOWS THAT INTENTION OF TWO LETTINGS S EPARATELY AND FIXES SEPARATE LEASE RENT. HE RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF SHAMBHU INVESTMENT P. LTD. VS. CIT (2003) 263 ITR 143 (S.C.). THEREFORE, THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A), THE SAME DESERVES TO BE UPHELD. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. S PECIFIC AMOUNT FOR RENT FOR BUILDING AS WELL AS FURNITURE FIXTURES AND AC ARE PROVIDED IN THE LEASE AGREEMENT. FITTINGS ARE SEPARABLE, WHICH CAN BE USED ANYWHERE ELSE ALSO. THE BUILDING CAN BE LET OUT WITHOUT FURN ITURE, WHICH WAS INTENTION OF THE APPELLANT. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COU RT DECISION CITED BY THE LEARNED A.R. IS SQUARELY APPLICABLE, THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT (A). ACCORDINGLY, WE DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER CONTENDS T HAT FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE BEING THE SAME, THE REVENUE APPEAL MAY BE DISMISSED. ITA NO. 89/JP/2013 DCIT , CIRCLE- 6, JAIPUR VS. PARAS PRATEEK REAL EST ATE (P) LTD. . 3 2.2 THE LD. DR IS HEARD. 2.3 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND MERIT IN THE CONTENTIO N OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT FACTS OF THE ASSESSEES CASE ARE SIMILAR TO THE FACTS IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 . THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THIS BENCH I N ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 3.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27/02/2 015. SD/- SD/- VH-VKJ-EHUK VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH (T.R. MEENA) (R.P.TOLANI) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 27 TH FEB, 2015 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- THE DCIT, CIRCLE- 2, JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- M/S. PARAS PARTEEK REAL ESTATE (P) LTD. , JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY ) @ CIT(A), JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, JAIPUR 4. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 5. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO.89/JP/2013) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR